On Donnerstag 27 Dezember 2007, Hans Meine wrote:
> [...] I noticed that files I encoded recently with lame 3.97 have
> the correct number of (audio data-only) MPA frames set, but the total byte
> count includes the Xing tag [itself].
>
> Is lame's behaviour in this respect documented anywhere (ideally for
> specific versions)?
>
> Is there a rationale for including the Xing tag in the byte count, but not
> in the frame count?
>
> Do you disagree with my own opinion that the Xing tag should be excluded
> from both values?
Now that I hope most people have returned from their christmas/new year
holidays, does noone have an opinion on this?
Ciao, / / .o.
/--/ ..o
/ / ANS ooo
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org
https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
